As Seen in Vanity Fair's August 2006 Issue!
As Seen in US News & World Report's September 11 Fifth Anniversary Issue!
As Seen in Time Magazine's September 11, 2006 Issue!
As Seen in Phoenix New Times' August 9, 2007 Issue!

Monday, October 14, 2013

Nine Eleven Know Nothings

I have often accused Truthers of talking about subjects they know nothing about, but usually they at least try and pretend that they do. So I was rather amused to read this post by Jon Gold on 9/11 Flogger (emphasis added), which otherwise has been pretty boring lately:

There's a subscription only article written by Dianne Feinstein right now on the WSJ called "The NSA's Watchfulness Protects America" with a sub headline that says, "If today's call-records program had been in place in before 9/11, the terrorist attacks likely would have been prevented." Unfortunately, I can't read it, however…
According to www.historycommons.org, in 1997 the U.S. Military and NSA asked for access to Telecom networks. In documents filed in 2006 by Joe Nacchio concerning his trial on insider trading charges, a Lieutenant General "told Mr. (Dean) Wandry (a member of Qwest) that he ran the largest telecom operation in the world, he had looked at Qwest's network, and he wanted to use it for government purposes." […] "By 1999, Qwest is working extensively with the NSA."

Of course if Jon had actually spent $2.00 at the newstand, or 30 seconds on Google looking up the article, he could have read what it actually entailed:

Consider the case of 9/11 hijacker Khalid al-Mihdhar, who was being watched by the CIA while he was in Malaysia. U.S. intelligence agencies failed to connect the dots before the attack to recognize that al-Mihdhar had flown with (future) hijacker Nawaf al-Hazmi to Los Angeles in January 2000.

Intelligence officials knew about an al Qaeda safe house in Yemen with ties to al-Mihdhar as well as the safe house's telephone number, but they had no way of knowing if anyone inside the U.S. was in contact with that phone number in Yemen. Only after 9/11 did we learn that al-Mihdhar, while living in San Diego, had called the safe house.

In congressional testimony in June, FBI Director Bob Mueller said that if intelligence officials had had the NSA's searchable database of U.S. telephone-call records before 9/11, they would have been able to connect the number to al-Mihdhar and produce actionable intelligence on participants of the developing plot. NSA Director Keith Alexander testified before Congress in October that if the call-records program had existed before 9/11, there is a "very high" likelihood that we would have detected the impending attack that killed 3,000 Americans.

And, if Jon had actually read the History Commons story he linked to, he would have seen that it involved a completely different subject:

By 1999 Qwest is working extensively with the NSA. Minihan is particularly concerned about the potential of “cyberwarfare” by foreign governments, terrorist organizations, drug cartels, and organized crime, a prospect which he felt the NSA is unprepared. He particularly worries about Russia and China; in June 1998, he will testify are training personnel in potential cyber-attacks. “These opportunists, enabled by the explosion of technology and the availability of inexpensive, secure means of communication, pose a significant threat to the interests of the United States and its allies,” Minihan will state. In 2007, a former senior NSA official will say that the agency felt those groups knew US privacy laws all too well and were capable of using those laws against the NSA and other intelligence agencies.

113 Comments:

NSA didn't have access to caller ID before 9/11. Too many "ACLU types" were complaining about caller ID so Hayden decided to scrap it completely. No area codes. No numbers. Just untraced calls from somewhere on planet Earth.

This is the sort of stuff sites like SLC Change would have people believe.

The CIA and FBI knew that al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar were in the US and were linked to all the terrorist chatter. Nobody in the US government has ever explained why they were protected from arrest. Instead they covered it up. That cover-up has enabled all the powergrabbing nonsense.

Phillip Marshall was a formal pilot and writer of “Lakefront Airport,” - “False Flag 911: How Bush, Cheney and the Saudis Created the Post-911 World (08)” and “The Big Bamboozle: 9/11 and the War on Terror.” Marshall wote in 2012 that 9/11 was staged by the US and Saoudi Arabia in stead of Al Qaeda. He was found in his house, together with his two children and their dog. They all were shot with a rifle..

Of course if Jon had actually spent $2.00 at the newstand, or 30 seconds on Google looking up the article, he could have read what it actually entailed:

Jon has apparently been confined to a nursing home for some time now, due to a back injury. His Facebook posts suggest that his family isn't exactly rushing to move him somewhere with more freedom. Almost like they don't trust him to function on his own.

Jon has apparently been confined to a nursing home for some time now, due to a back injury. His Facebook posts suggest that his family isn't exactly rushing to move him somewhere with more freedom. Almost like they don't trust him to function on his own.

And that sad turn of events has apparently not made Jon realize that life is short and there are better things to do with one's life than chase idiotic conspiracy theories. Oh well. It ain't my life being wasted.

I'm glad that everyone is watching me on Facebook. What you fail to see in the article is that I was showing in the first paragraph that Telecoms and the NSA already had a relationship... what you failed to mention in your write up was the following...

In February 2001, three different U.S. Telecom firms cooperate with the NSA surveillance program, but Qwest refuses. The three that cooperate are AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth. "Qwest officials are unsure that it is legal to hand over customer information to the government without court warrants." [...] "(Joe) Nacchio is so disturbed by the idea of the NSA wiretapping phones without warrants, and is so unsure of what information would be collected and how it might be used, that he decides the company will not cooperate. The NSA tells Qwest and other companies that not only would it compile and maintain data on U.S. Citizens' phone habits, but it may well share that information with other U.S. Government agencies, including the CIA, the Drug Enforcement Administration, and the FBI."

So you see, it seems that "today's call-records program" in some fashion "had been in place before 9/11" not to mention a program called Echelon (at the time of 9/11, protests against Echelon were taking place), and PROMIS.

Putting aside all of that, the NSA and 9/11 is a murky subject to begin with. The 9/11 Commission barely investigated the NSA, and there are many, many, many (to name a few) things that need to be investigated.

Track, Richard Clarke and some others have speculated that al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar were protected because the US hoped to recruit them as double agents. I'm not aware that the evidence for this notion is very convincing.

truth hurts, the Philip Marshall news was from last February.

RGT, "the system was blinking red", the CIA was warning that "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US", and al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar bought 10 airline tickets dated 9/11/01 under their own real names. There was no good reason to pretend that an imminent threat was not suspected.

Ian, what could be more of a waste of life than lying anonymously on the internet?

Jon, they don't "debunk" here. They just slather on the attitude to try to give the appearance of debunking. It's good enough for the simple-minded like Ian and MGF and GutterBall.

You are making a strawman argument. Nobody is saying that the NSA had no relationship with any telecom before 9/11. Of course they did. The argument that Feinstein made, and had you actually read the argument, you would be aware of this, is regarding the merits of one particular call logging program.

Ian, what could be more of a waste of life than lying anonymously on the internet?

Good question. So you, "snug.bug" admit that you are petgoat, punxsutawneybarney, contrivance, truebeleaguer, truetruther, etc.?

Jon, they don't "debunk" here. They just slather on the attitude to try to give the appearance of debunking. It's good enough for the simple-minded like Ian and MGF and GutterBall.

Squeal squeal squeal!

Brian, there's nothing to debunk. 9/11 truth is dead, and you just repeat the same spam about modified attack baboons, magic thermite elves, and invisible widows. What else is there to do but point and laugh at hopeless losers like you?

Strawman nothing... Feinstein claimed that the surveillance didn't exist before 9/11, and I showed that she's wrong. Nothing strawman about it. That was the whole point of the article, with the addition of other tidbits about the NSA and 9/11.

It only makes sense in hindsight. Truther claims of negligence and/or foreknowledge are backed by mere wishful thinking.

Claims are backed by the official record. Feinstein even states Tenet's concerns in her stupid Op-Ed.

FBI agent Steve Bongardt knew at the time. He couldn't believe the UBLU refused to let the Cole investigators find al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar. This was BEFORE 9/11. He made comments like "They aren't going to f**king Disneyland!"

Alec Station Deputy Chief Tom Wilshire knew. He wrote an email stating that associates of Bin Attash would be of extra importance and likely at the center of the next al Qaeda attack. Al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar were linked to Bin Attash by way of the al Qaeda meeting in Malaysia. The information about this meeting was withheld from the Cole investigators before 9/11. In his book former FBI agent Ali Soufan recalls being told after 9/11 and was so sickened he rushed to a bathroom and vomited.

Why won't Feinstein explain any of this to the public? Why won't she explain to families of the Cole victims why the investigation into their murders was obstructed? Has Feinstein ever held a meeting with any 9/11 victims families and told them why it made sense for the CIA to obstruct al Qaeda investigations? Of course not! She is all about exploiting the murders for political gain.

None of what you cite demonstrates negligence or foreknowledge. You seem unable to grasp that vital connections only became clear after the fact.

So the obstruction of the Cole investigation was ok? Nothing odd about that? The obstruction of the effort to find guys directly linked to key Cole plotter Bin Attash was ok? Even though this obstruction took place when the CIA was giving the White House urgent warnings of a possible al Qaeda attack?

RGT, no hindsight is needed. Al Qaeda's plot to fly hijacked airliners into landmark buildings had been known since 1995. Airspace was closed over the Atlanta Olympics in 1996. There were warnings from 13 foreign countries, four FBI offices, and the CIA. The August 6 "Bin Laden Determined to Strike" memo warned of preparations for hijackings. Before that memos warning of al Qaeda attacks were sent 4/20. 5/3, 5/23, 5/26, 6/23,6/25, 6/30, and 7/2 (See Shenon, p. 152). Clarke was bombarding Condi with emails about terrorist threats. June 28 he wrote Condi that analysts at CIA, DIA, and NSA believed that a major attack was likely soon. Your claim that 9/11 was a surprise is contrary to reality.

She is talking about a specific type of call logging and data mining, not "surveillance programs" in general. You think there has only been one type of surveillance program in the history of intelligence collection?

The insane pervert scribbles, "...Hey GutterBall, was that you I saw today in the '78 Dodge Aspen all pimped out with spinner wheelcovers [SIC] and pinstripes? Bwa ha ha! How's the family therapy thing going?"

Insane and illiterate -- what a charming combination.

So goat fucker, have you tried to ruin Carol Brouillet's marriage lately?

"...I don't think your attacks on me, Kevin Barrett, and William Rodriguez have anything to do with Kevin Barrett or William Rodriguez or anything rational. The attacks have to do with Brian Good and Carol Brouillet and are completely emotional. You have a crush on me and erroneously hold delusions about me. You are being irrationally jealous of Kevin and William. You cannot accept the fact that I am happily married and refuse to allow you to TRY to cause trouble between my husband and I. Because of your delusions, I cannot ever feel "safe" in your presence alone, and would rather not see you again, but you are so desperate for attention that you are doing extremely negative, destructive things- attacking me and respected members of the 9/11 Truth Movement to force me to pay attention to you..."Please stop attacking Kevin, William and I. Do something useful- attack the people who did 9/11, not the people who are putting so much effort into exposing the lies and stopping them. Leave me alone- stop the email attacks on me and others. I think it probably harms your reputation more than mine, although it is horrifically embarrassing to me to think that at one time I thought of you as a friend. Now I only see you as a threat to me, my family, the Northern California 9/11 Truth Alliance and the 9/11 Truth Movement. I have zero confidence in your judgement and rationality." -- Carol Brouillet

And yet another question, Perv: Do you still vandalize the Chinese Gymnast's Wikipedia entry -- you old pervert?

Lock up the barn, hide the livestock and put the adolescent boys in the basement, Brian "snug.bug" Good is on the loose!

[2] Given the weight of each floor, calculate the upper and lower static load boundaries for each floor in kilograms.

[3] Given Newton's Second Law of Motion, which states

F = ma

derive a differential equation that describes an accreting mass.

[4] At collapse initiation, NIST tells us that the upper floor hit the lower floor in 0.43 seconds. How fast was the accreting mass moving when the upper floor struck the lower floor? Give your answer in m/s and MPH.

[5] Calculate the force the upper portion of the tower exerted on the lower floors. Give your answer in kg.m/s^2 and convert that answer to lbs.

[6] Compare the value from question number [5] to the upper and lower static load boundaries for each floor which you gave us in question [2]. Which value is greater? And by how much?

How many times must I ask you to substantiate your idiotic assertions, Mr. bogus "scientific reputation"?

RGT, no hindsight is needed. Al Qaeda's plot to fly hijacked airliners into landmark buildings had been known since 1995. Airspace was closed over the Atlanta Olympics in 1996. There were warnings from 13 foreign countries, four FBI offices, and the CIA. The August 6 "Bin Laden Determined to Strike" memo warned of preparations for hijackings. Before that memos warning of al Qaeda attacks were sent 4/20. 5/3, 5/23, 5/26, 6/23,6/25, 6/30, and 7/2 (See Shenon, p. 152). Clarke was bombarding Condi with emails about terrorist threats. June 28 he wrote Condi that analysts at CIA, DIA, and NSA believed that a major attack was likely soon. Your claim that 9/11 was a surprise is contrary to reality.

And yet Brian has been trying to "explain" to us how magic thermite elves blew up the WTC for almost 5 years now. You'd think if there's "no point" to it, he would have stopped a while ago.

These guys have a desperate need to feel superior, so they think intelligence agents are stupid.

Brian, we are superior to you. Pretty much every person on earth is superior to you. You're 60 years old and live with your parents because you can't hold down a job as a janitor. You have no friends, no hobbies, no family, and you've been banned from every truther group for being a pervert and sex predator and liar and lunatic.

Find one person here whose life is as much of an abject failure as yours. Hell, try to find one person here whose haircut is as hideous as yours.

Jon, these guys have given up all pretense to rationality and simply engage in muttering, attitude, and libel. Years ago there were some thoughtful posters here who had actually read some books and wanted to talk about the issues.

GutterBall, NIST claims they have not done your calculations--so why should I? If you believe those calcs are relevant, then NIST's claim that they have not done them should bother you.

There's no point in me doing them. If I did, you would just lie about it.

When are you going to beat me up, coward? Are you so busy teaching your daughters how to pleasure a man that you don't have time to get on a bus?

The lying liar lies, "...NIST claims they have not done your calculations--so why should I? If you believe those calcs are relevant, then NIST's claim that they have not done them should bother you."

Stop trying to shift the blame for your incompetence to NIST, liar. You claim the accreting mass did not have sufficient force to initiate a global progressive collapse of the Twin Towers. Well, here's your chance to prove it, Mr. bogus "scientific reputation."

But you can't prove anything because you're a lying charlatan who spams SLC with pseudo-science and nonsense. Right, pervert?

[2] Given the weight of each floor, calculate the upper and lower static load boundaries for each floor in kilograms.

[3] Given Newton's Second Law of Motion, which states

F = ma

derive a differential equation that describes an accreting mass.

[4] At collapse initiation, NIST tells us that the upper floor hit the lower floor in 0.43 seconds. How fast was the accreting mass moving when the upper floor struck the lower floor? Give your answer in m/s and MPH.

[5] Calculate the force the upper portion of the tower exerted on the lower floors. Give your answer in kg.m/s^2 and convert that answer to lbs.

[6] Compare the value from question number [5] to the upper and lower static load boundaries for each floor which you gave us in question [2]. Which value is greater? And by how much?

All you do is lie, liar. You put words in people's mouths that they never said. What do you put in your daughters' mouths, UtterFail, and how to they feel about it? Why are you stonewalling about your daughters?

I gave you the link to your "meatball on a fork" nonsense, so stop lying, liar.

You claim the accreting mass did not have sufficient force to cause a global progressive collapse of the Twin Towers, OTHERWISE, WHY THE FUCK RE YOU SPAMMING SLC WITH 9/11 CONSPIRACY THEORIES -- YOU GODDAMNED LIAR?

[2] Given the weight of each floor, calculate the upper and lower static load boundaries for each floor in kilograms.

[3] Given Newton's Second Law of Motion, which states

F = ma

derive a differential equation that describes an accreting mass.

[4] At collapse initiation, NIST tells us that the upper floor hit the lower floor in 0.43 seconds. How fast was the accreting mass moving when the upper floor struck the lower floor? Give your answer in m/s and MPH.

[5] Calculate the force the upper portion of the tower exerted on the lower floors. Give your answer in kg.m/s^2 and convert that answer to lbs.

[6] Compare the value from question number [5] to the upper and lower static load boundaries for each floor which you gave us in question [2]. Which value is greater? And by how much?

I can sit here and POUND YOU WITH THE TRUTH WHILE YOU RUN AWAY SQUEALING AND CRYING ALL DAY, LIAR.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

You're a coward and a charlatan who utterly fails to substantiate his 9/11 conspiracy nonsense. Should we expect less from a proven pervert and a compulsive liar? Probably not.

"...Clearly you can't see that for the top of the tower to fall through the lower part of the tower would not be like a piledriver [SIC] pounding a pile but like trying to pound a rake with another rake." -- Brian "petgoat" Good, lying his ass off on DU, 18 May 2006.

No, you never tried to claim the force exerted by the accreting mass was insifficient to initiate a global progressive collapse. Not at all.

"...The rake on rake implication is obvious to ANYONE with any understanding of the construction of the twin towers and the official hypothesis about the collapses." -- Brian "petgoat" Good, lying his ass off on DU, 22 May 2008.

Yeah, it's "obvious" until someone actually challenges your pseudo-science. Then it's time to STONEWALL and run away squealing and crying.

"...Clearly you can't see that for the top of the tower to fall through the lower part of the tower would not be like a piledriver [SIC] pounding a pile but like trying to pound a rake with another rake." -- Brian "petgoat" Good, lying his ass off on DU, 18 May 2008.

"...The rake on rake implication is obvious to ANYONE with any understanding of the construction of the twin towers and the official hypothesis about the collapses." -- Brian "petgoat" Good, lying his ass off on DU, 22 May 2008.

Now claim you never tried to convince DU that the force exerted by the accreting mass was insufficient to cause a global progressive collapse of the Twin Towers.

You'll lie EVEN WHEN THE EVIDENCE STARES YOU STRAIGHT IN YOUR LYING FERRET FACE!

[2] Given the weight of each floor, calculate the upper and lower static load boundaries for each floor in kilograms.

[3] Given Newton's Second Law of Motion, which states

F = ma

derive a differential equation that describes an accreting mass.

[4] At collapse initiation, NIST tells us that the upper floor hit the lower floor in 0.43 seconds. How fast was the accreting mass moving when the upper floor struck the lower floor? Give your answer in m/s and MPH.

[5] Calculate the force the upper portion of the tower exerted on the lower floors. Give your answer in kg.m/s^2 and convert that answer to lbs.

[6] Compare the value from question number [5] to the upper and lower static load boundaries for each floor which you gave us in question [2]. Which value is greater? And by how much?

No, you never tried to claim the force exerted by the accreting mass was insufficient to cause global progressive collapse of the Twin Towers, except when you claim the accreting mass was insufficient to cause global progressive collapse of the Twin Towers. Right, liar?

What makes you think rake on rake is about accreting mass, fool? How does the mass accrete?

Did you never learn to do word problems in math?

I never tried to claim the force exerted by the accreting mass was insufficient to cause global progressive collapse of the Twin Towers. Why would I claim that? I'm not like you. I don't make gaudy claims about things I know nothing about.

Stop trying to change the subject with your idiotic diversionary tactics and answer the questions, liar.

You were caught red-handed lying again, and all you can do is change the subject. We all know you've never posted a word in defense of the "meatball on a fork" theory to SLC, except when you post nonsense in defense of your "meatball on a fork" theory to SLC. Right, liar?

[2] Given the weight of each floor, calculate the upper and lower static load boundaries for each floor in kilograms.

[3] Given Newton's Second Law of Motion, which states

F = ma

derive a differential equation that describes an accreting mass.

[4] At collapse initiation, NIST tells us that the upper floor hit the lower floor in 0.43 seconds. How fast was the accreting mass moving when the upper floor struck the lower floor? Give your answer in m/s and MPH.

[5] Calculate the force the upper portion of the tower exerted on the lower floors. Give your answer in kg.m/s^2 and convert that answer to lbs.

[6] Compare the value from question number [5] to the upper and lower static load boundaries for each floor which you gave us in question [2]. Which value is greater? And by how much?

No, you never tried to claim the force exerted by the accreting mass was insufficient to cause global progressive collapse of the Twin Towers, except when you claim the accreting mass was insufficient to cause global progressive collapse of the Twin Towers. Right, liar?

Utterfail, you keep posting the same stupid spam--as if it will be smarter the tenth time than it was the first time.

You seem to have some childish belief in the accretion of meaning through repetition.

What makes you think I have a meatball on a fork theory? You seem to think that if I defend it, I must have written it. That belief only shows your lack of mathematical understanding. Did you never have set theory?

RGT, no hindsight is needed. Al Qaeda's plot to fly hijacked airliners into landmark buildings had been known since 1995. Airspace was closed over the Atlanta Olympics in 1996. There were warnings from 13 foreign countries, four FBI offices, and the CIA. The August 6 "Bin Laden Determined to Strike" memo warned of preparations for hijackings. Before that memos warning of al Qaeda attacks were sent 4/20. 5/3, 5/23, 5/26, 6/23,6/25, 6/30, and 7/2 (See Shenon, p. 152). Clarke was bombarding Condi with emails about terrorist threats. June 28 he wrote Condi that analysts at CIA, DIA, and NSA believed that a major attack was likely soon. Your claim that 9/11 was a surprise is contrary to reality.

RGT, no hindsight is needed. Al Qaeda's plot to fly hijacked airliners into landmark buildings had been known since 1995. Airspace was closed over the Atlanta Olympics in 1996. There were warnings from 13 foreign countries, four FBI offices, and the CIA. The August 6 "Bin Laden Determined to Strike" memo warned of preparations for hijackings. Before that memos warning of al Qaeda attacks were sent 4/20. 5/3, 5/23, 5/26, 6/23,6/25, 6/30, and 7/2 (See Shenon, p. 152). Clarke was bombarding Condi with emails about terrorist threats. June 28 he wrote Condi that analysts at CIA, DIA, and NSA believed that a major attack was likely soon. Your claim that 9/11 was a surprise is contrary to reality.

...with this one...

I don't have an opinion on whether bin Laden did it or not. I don't have enough information to know.

See, Brian's so stupid he can't even keep his truther talking points straight. So bin Laden was so obviously guilty that we should have seen in months/years in advance, but Brian doesn't know if he did it, at the same time.

Stuff like this is probably why you're an unemployed janitor who lives with his parents. When you put "2+2=3" and "2+2=5" on the same quiz in 1st grade, you probably should have listened to your teacher when she corrected you, instead of telling her she lives in a fantasy world and trying to fondle her.

Ian, it's a good thing that you don't have a job with any real responsibility, and it's a good thing you don't have any people depending on you.

Demolishing RGT's claim that the attacks were unexpected is an apple. Whether Osama did it or not is an orange.

I suppose if I told one guy that a Deere was more powerful than a Farmall, and told another that a Farmall was more reliable than a Deere, you be all in a snit about that "contradiction" too. Like GutterBall, you're not interested in process but only in getting the "right" answer the laziest possible way.

Ian, it's a good thing that you don't have a job with any real responsibility, and it's a good thing you don't have any people depending on you.

Squeal squeal squeal!

Poor Brian. He knew I was going to humiliate him, but I lured him into making an idiotic statement anyway, and then I mocked him mercilessly, and now he's hysterical because he's been pwn3d.

Demolishing RGT's claim that the attacks were unexpected is an apple. Whether Osama did it or not is an orange.

C'mon, Brian, you've got better analogies than that:

"Skidmark: sometimes I wash my hideous homeless mullet with dish detergent, sometimes I sniff glue and watch 'Flintstones' reruns until 3 am. You live in a fantasy world."

There, that's much better.

I suppose if I told one guy that a Deere was more powerful than a Farmall, and told another that a Farmall was more reliable than a Deere, you be all in a snit about that "contradiction" too. Like GutterBall, you're not interested in process but only in getting the "right" answer the laziest possible way.

Brian, you're not a farmer. You're a failed janitor who lives with his parents and posts spam about modified attack baboons all over the internet. Nobody cares what you think about Deeres or Farmalls.

In August 2001, Zacarius Mousaoui is arrested by the FBI--they are concerned that he might want to hijack a 747.

Also in August, the Mossad warns of 19 terrorists inside the USA with big plans. Names are named, including 4 alleged participants in the 9/11 plot.

Also in August, Vladimir Putin warns that suicide pilots are training for attacks on US targets.A Russian newspaper claims: “Russian Intelligence agents know the organizers and executors of these terrorist attacks. More than that, Moscow warned Washington about preparation to these actions a couple of weeks before they happened.”

And before you start squealing hysterically about that, let me remind you that "the widows have no questions" is an apple, and "Brian still hasn't gotten a single questions from the widows answered" is an orange.

Pat and Jon like to cite the Wall Street Journal, as if it's authoritative, I don't. It's a right-wing propaganda rag which also regularly publishes climate denial nonsense. Bizarrely, there are people who are willing pay for reading propaganda though. The WSJ targets such people.

I prefer Pro Publica's 9/11-NSA fact piece, although a bit limited:

http://www.propublica.org/article/fact-check-the-nsa-and-sept-11

Unsurprisingly, the usual suspects (Zelikow, Mueller) are lying about 9/11, but Matthew Aid and Richard Clarke are telling the truth. The government has been lying through its teeth about the NSA all along, as we discovered thanks to Edward Snowden. Yeah, the US government is very credible about surveillance. "No sir, not wittingly".

Suppose we grant these liars the benefit of the doubt, for the sake of argument, then even according to the WSJ they had enough dots from a multitude of sources to prevent 9/11, but they failed to connect them. In other words, an intelligence failure, like what happens every time Pat posts a blog.

Then they have no argument legitimizing an unconstitutional surveillance state. They're simply stating how incompetent they are even with a large volume of valuable intelligence. The sort of intelligence data Tenet lied to Richard Clarke about.

Then wouldn't even have that argument if there were five 9/11's on one day, because you don't destroy a democracy forever to fight "the terrorists"... forever.

"Seven months before the threat of terrorism got President George W. Bush's attention (despite the best efforts of then-counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke to install it on everyone’s screen-saver, so to speak), the administration instructed NSA to suborn American telecommunications companies to spy illegally on Americans.

The general counsel of Qwest Communications advised management that what NSA was suggesting was illegal. And to his credit, the head of the company at that time stuck to a firm “No,” unless some way were found to perform legally what NSA wanted done.

Qwest’s rivals, though, took their cue from the White House, and adopted a flexible attitude toward the law—and got the business. They are now being sued. Lawsuit filings claim that, seven months before 9/11, AT&T “began development of a center for monitoring long-distance calls and Internet transmissions and other digital information for the exclusive use of the NSA.”

Adding insult to injury, draft legislation now being pushed by the White House would hold AT&T and other collaborators harmless for playing fast and loose with our right to privacy in order to enhance their bottom line.

For its principled but, in government eyes, recalcitrant attitude, Qwest indicates that it lost out on lucrative government contracts."

"...In other words, an intelligence failure, like what happens every time Pat posts a blog."

Yawn.

That means a lot coming from a guy who associates with perverts and compulsive liars.

It's no secret that Cheney and Bush were only concerned with formulating "energy policy" at the time, so it's not surprising that the ubur incompetent Bush administration ignored the intelligence. After all, Bush and Dead Eye Dick had more important matters to address. That said, incompetence doesn't equal "conspiracy."

Oh, Gutterball has it all figured out. Does the 9/11 Commission support your "incompetence" theory? How come these "incompetents" weren't disclipined? Was Condi Rice distracted by the energy policy? Condi was promoted to Secretary of State.

Have you molested your daughters yet this weekend, Guitar Bill? If not, are you planning to do so before Monday?

Only an idiot, a liar and a pervert like Brian "snug.bug" Good would debate the incompetence of the Bush administration. The same Bush administration that caused the collapse of the world's economy. No, the Bush administration wasn't incompetent, not at all. Right, shit for brains?

But, then again, Brian Good is grossly incompetent so he has a lot in common with GWB and Dead Eye Dick...

Your incompetence is only exceeded by your dishonesty and duplicity -- you fuckin' 'tard.

Poor GutterBall seems to be incapable of recognizing that almost all of Bush's alleged incompetence had the effect of benefiting his very powerful and wealthy friends. He's also incapable of recognizing that the claimed incompetence has to this day represented a very effective defense that has shielded him from criminal prosecution.

So GutterBall, is it true that you just can't keep your hands out of your children's undies? If so, why is that? Has this kind of thing been a problem for you your entire life?

The pervert scribbles, "...Poor GutterBall seems to be incapable of recognizing that almost all of Bush's alleged incompetence had the effect of benefiting his very powerful and wealthy friends. He's also incapable of recognizing that the claimed incompetence has to this day represented a very effective defense that has shielded him from criminal prosecution."

I can prove that Cheney and Bush are incompetent with three words: laissez faire capitalism.

Laissez faire was the Bush administrations economic policy. As any competent high school grad knows, Calvin Coolidge's laissez faire economic policy caused the Great Depression. Thus, Bush and Cheney are incompetent fools who refused to learn from history.

So much for your bullshit, faggot.

So when do you plan to pick a park in Palo Alto where we can meet, cocksucker? After all, it will only take 30 seconds for me to put you in the ICU.

Oh, that's right! Brian Good is a pussy who hides behind his semen-encrusted keyboard.

GEORGE W. BUSH IS THE FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES -- YOU GODDAMNED IDIOT. HISTORY BOOKS WILL BE WRITTEN ABOUT BUSH AND CHENEY AND THE GLOBAL DEPRESSION CAUSED BY THEIR MISGUIDED ECONOMIC POLICIES.

Yeah, Bush and Cheney tossed their legacy down the toilet in order to pad the bank accounts of their cronies.

See? You're an idiot. You know as much about human nature as you know about everything else: NOTHING.

Your idiotic theories simply don't stand up to scrutiny -- and you're too stupid to see what an idiot you make of yourself.

It's no secret that you tried to suck William Rodriguez's cock. Everyone knows that your obsession with Willie is the result of Willie's rejection of your disgusting homosexual advances.

So when do you plan to pick a park in Palo Alto where we can meet, pervert? After all, it will only take 30 seconds for me to put you in the ICU.

Bush and Cheney tossed their legacy down the toilet in order to pad the bank accounts of their cronies. You don't believe it? They are ideologues that believe that padding the bank accounts of their cronies is a service to progress and human development. Obama clearly believes the same thing.

I have no obsession with Willie. I was only thorough about exposing the fraudulent nature of his hero story. I've proven that he's a fraud. He's done. He couldn't even get his buddy Kevin Barrett to feature him in the DC conference.

Putting me in the ICU wouldn't heal the horror of any crimes perpetrated on your daughters ButtGale. It would only make you feel better about it.

You are engaging in criminal threats of bodily harm, as well as libeling me obsessively. Cease and desist.

The nonsense-spewing retard squeals, "...Bush and Cheney tossed their legacy down the toilet in order to pad the bank accounts of their cronies. You don't believe it? They are ideologues that believe that padding the bank accounts of their cronies is a service to progress and human development. Obama clearly believes the same thing."

Squeal, squeal, squeal.

And what does shit for brains offer to substantiate his asinine assertion? You guessed it! Absolutely nothing.

Assertions aren't evidence, ass.

Your theory is a pile of crap. Bush--who, like you, is a disgusting narcissist--would never toss his legacy down the toilet in order to grow the bank accounts of people who are so rich they don't need the money. A narcissist like GW Bush would never willingly tarnish his precious image--you droolin' 'tard. Thus, your theory makes no sense whatsoever.

FAIL

"...I don't think your attacks on me, Kevin Barrett, and William Rodriguez have anything to do with Kevin Barrett or William Rodriguez or anything rational. The attacks have to do with Brian Good and Carol Brouillet and are completely emotional. You have a crush on me and erroneously hold delusions about me. You are being irrationally jealous of Kevin and William. You cannot accept the fact that I am happily married and refuse to allow you to TRY to cause trouble between my husband and I. Because of your delusions, I cannot ever feel 'safe' in your presence alone, and would rather not see you again, but you are so desperate for attention that you are doing extremely negative, destructive things- attacking me and respected members of the 9/11 Truth Movement to force me to pay attention to you.

"Please stop attacking Kevin, William and I. Do something useful- attack the people who did 9/11, not the people who are putting so much effort into exposing the lies and stopping them. Leave me alone- stop the email attacks on me and others. I think it probably harms your reputation more than mine, although it is horrifically embarrassing to me to think that at one time I thought of you as a friend. Now I only see you as a threat to me, my family, the Northern California 9/11 Truth Alliance and the 9/11 Truth Movement. I have zero confidence in your judgement and rationality." -- Carol Brouillet

You're a pervert who was kicked out of the 9/11 "truth" movement. In fact, even your buddy SnowCrash admits that you were banned by the "TruthAction" moderator after your sexual degeneracy was exposed to the light of day.

The "TruthAction" moderator certain must believe Ms. Brouillet's account, because he banned you from "TruthAction" once he discovered your history of sex stalking and overt sexual degeneracy.

FAIL

The lying liar lies, "...My attacks on Kevin and Willie have been completely vindicated. I was right."

The only thing you've managed to prove is that you're delusional.

In fact, you haven't proven shit -- you Goddamned liar.

"...I literally had to kick him out. This guy [Rodriguez] wanted to stay with me all the time...This is the true hero of 9/11." -- Officer David Lim

Officer Lim is an eyewitness to Willie's heroics. You, on the other hand, were masturbating 3,000 miles away on the other side of the country on that fateful morning. Furthermore, Officer Lim has NEVER retracted his statement. Thus, William Rodriguez is a hero, and YOU are a disgusting liar.

"You are STILL pimping that "circular argument" reproach while it has been debunked pages ago. A domino falls because a domino falls. Is that a circular argument? No, it isn't. Of course not. It's a simple cause and effect chain where each element is physically and positionally distinct from the element causing its demise. You pretend you haven't read or haven't been made aware of this rebuttal of your ridiculous fallacy allegation, because you mean to irritate. Because you're butthurt. Because this is your disruption strategy, because you're so "polite". How utterly pathetic. You're not polite, you're a cunning troll who has optimized his survival tactics.

"You've been repeatedly asked to back up your ignorant assertions and the AE911Truth talking points you parrot. You simply don't. You think you'll be just fine trolling. I asked a couple of additional questions two times now and you've ignored them too. You claim not to believe CD but you've made a laundry list of declarative statements which match the description of a Controlled Demolition believer to a T. Your sole reason for non-committal is plausible deniability [SIC] should any of your spurious claims be proven unequivocally false, but you might as well let go of that tactic, because, as you've demonstrated in this thread, you'd lie about visual observations even as they stand facing you when you quote them in reply. A shameless liar of your caliber needs no additional insurance policies." -- SnowCrash, 911: Only the tip of the Iceberg.

So, you're described as a "cunning troll," and a "shameless liar" -- which is a perfectly accurate description of you and your behavior.

The fact, if it is a fact, that Officer Lim kicked Willie out of the building in no way proves that Willie's fraudulent hero story is true. Your inability to learn these simple things makes quite unbelievable your claim that you have a college education.

Your link to the alleged remarks by SnowCrash is dead. Do you have a point?

Officer Lim distanced himself from Willie AFTER Officer Lim discovered that Willie is a member of YOUR IDIOTIC 9/11 "TRUTH" MOVEMENT. The same 9/11 "truth" movement which accuses the FDNY and the NJ/NY Port Authority of participating in the "controlled demolition conspiracy."

Thus, your argument, like everything else you spew, is a pile of crap.

FAIL

The lying liar lies, "...The fact, if it is a fact, that Officer Lim kicked Willie out of the building in no way proves that Willie's fraudulent hero story is true."

He didn't just kick Willie out of the building, he also DECLARED WILLIE A HERO.

"...I literally had to kick him out. This guy [Rodriguez] wanted to stay with me all the time...This is the true hero of 9/11." -- Officer David Lim

Who do you think you're fooling by telling half-truths, liar?

Did you think by repeating the same lies over and over over and over over and over over and over over and over again that I would forget how to debunk your pathetic lies?

I didn't lie about anything. Officer Lim's refusal to comment about Willie was cited by the Der Spiegel article--and this was after Willie had repudiated the truth movement, claiming he didn't believe the conspiracy stuff any more.

The fact that Officer Lim declared Willie a hero does not disprove the fact that Willie's story was fraudulent. Maybe Office Lim believed Willie's fraudulent claims when he declared Willie to be a hero.

Have you finished molesting your daughters today, ButtGoo, or are you saving that for evening time?

Officer Lim has never retracted his statement wherein he describes Willie as a "hero." And I quote:

"...I literally had to kick him out. This guy [Rodriguez] wanted to stay with me all the time...This is the true hero of 9/11." -- Officer David Lim

FAIL

Face it, goat fucker, you have NOTHING on Willie. All you have are you twisted lies and half-truths. And lies and half-truths are still lies.

FAIL

Now spam the blog with more lies -- you delusional, disgusting pervert. What's truly pathetic is that you think you're actually winning the "debate" -- which is proof positive that you're delusional. Nothing more clearly demonstrates your insanity. NOTHING.

Brian Good said: "Your link to the alleged remarks by SnowCrash is dead. Do you have a point?"

Yes, he has a point. The link is dead, but the quote is authentic. I should know, because I'm the one who wrote the "alleged" remarks. But we all know one of your troll tactics is to "source repudiate" and question authenticity to the point of solipsist insanity. You're a joke Brian.

You originally came up with these tactics after the accusations against you are your stalking became so serious, you had no other recourse but to stoop to the level of feigning incredulity. It caused annoyance, which you enjoyed, which encouraged you to do it more often.

And Bill, Brian Good is not my "buddy" and never was, either. And you can't simultaneously quote my contempt for him and claim I "associate" with the guy as well. The closest contact between us was adjacent forum postings. His harassment of Willie Rodriguez is disgusting, although that is just the tip of the ice berg. But, I don't want to get embroiled in this endless, pointless feeding cycle of hate between the two of you. Brian Good is a man whose reputation is so destroyed, he isn't worth wasting any time and effort on. Move on.

And since I'm not American, I don't have to keep wishing the US government is, at its core, still benign, just to feel better.

Your malevolent feelings toward the US government are rooted in your malevolent feelings toward Microsoft. I see no other explanation for your contempt toward an institution you claim to have no stake in.

"SnowCrash", you were once one of the brighter posters on 9/11. But apparently you do not understand that any fool can set up a blogger id as "SnowCrash" and so there is no way of authenticating that you are the same as any of the other SnowCrashes that post on the internet. Your authentication of ButtGoo's quote is thus meaningless. The real SnowCrash was bright enough to understand stuff like that.

The "accusations" against me of stalking were never anything but lies. Mrs. Brouillet never accused me of stalking her. Kevin and Willie considered it stalking when I posted comments on news articles about them. They don't get news articles about them any more, except Kevin has a relationship with Press TV.

I didn't harass Willie Rodriguez. I exposed him as a fraud, and proved his hero story was a lie. If that's disgusting it's only because Willie is disgusting, a slimy creep who stole his glory from the dead and only got away with it for so long because nobody could believe that anyone could be such a scumbag.

It's too bad you have no friends, no job, and are a deranged sex stalker, Brian, otherwise you might be able to spend your weekends like normal people do: hiking, seeing live music, hanging out with friends. That's what I did this weekend.

And now that it's all done, I can come back to this blog and humiliate you by reminding you that the widows have no questions.

The only reason Brian joined the truth movement (before he was banned) was because he wanted to marry Laurie Van Auken, and being the deranged lunatic that he is, Brian figured posting spam about her on an obscure blog would make her fall in love with him.